Monorepo structure

[0xGabi]

Change the structure of Aragon CLI to be a monorepo.

Kick off discussion: AragonDAC/create-aragon-app#1

TODO:

• dao-cmds
• apm-cmds
• Ipfs-cmds

[0xGabi]

I started working on this issue and I been thinking a few things:

1. I believe it make sense to include the boilerplates, I found them to be related to the cli at some extend (is aragen also a posible candidate to include as a package?)
2. A few structures I thought:

aragonCLI/
  package.json
  packages/
    apm/
      package.json
    dao/
      package.json
    utils/  *this is cli-utils*
      package.json
    create-aragon-app/
      package.json
    bare-boilerplate/
      package.json
    react-boilerplate/
      package.json
    react-kit-boilerplate/
      package.json

aragonCLI/
  package.json
  cli/
    apm/
      package.json
    dao/
      package.json
    util/
      package.json
    …
  util/
    create-aragon-app/
      package.json
    …
  boilerplates/
    bare/
      package.json
    react/
      package.json
    react-kit/
      package.json

@osarrouy what do you think?

[osarrouy]

Hey @galactusss

I'm not sure about Aragen cause i've not dived into its code yet but doesn't it introduce some cyclic dependencies ? Not sure about that. Otherwise i think it makes sense to introduce it in the monorepo as all the CLI related tools will rely on it.

Regarding the monorepo structure i'm not sure either - lots of doubts this morning ;) I definitely find the second version cleaner and really like it. However the last time I tried to play with a non-standard monorepo struct - i.e. every packages under the packages folder - I ran into a couple of issue. But maybe it was because of my particular monorepo structure. I can't remember to be honest.

Have you tried to mock both of these structures with lerna ? Was it fine ?

[0xGabi]

Thank you for the feedback. I read the same thing, others bumped into problems with an structure similar to the second. Also, 0x have a bunch of package and they are using the first one. So I will go with the first structure.

I did mock a first basic example in my repo aragonCLI. As first step, I would like to refactor at something like this

[sohkai]

I believe it make sense to include the boilerplates, I found them to be related to the cli at some extend (is aragen also a posible candidate to include as a package?)

I think it might get harder to clone the boilerplates if we included it in a monorepo (don't think it's easy to only clone a particular directory from a repo), so I'd probably leave them out.

aragen would make sense to include in the repo, however its problem is that it has a fairly involved installation phase as well an automated release strategy through merges to master. If we do move it, I'd do it later once we've settled on the structure.

---

On the lerna structure, you'll notice we don't use the "packages" lerna structure in aragon-apps. I don't think naming the directories different makes a big difference, but it's just that they'll be in different scopes with lerna usually using "packages" as the default scope.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for contributing to Aragon! 🦅

[macor161]

@0xGabi Don't know if you want to reopen this?

[0xGabi]

Yes let's do it to track our progress with v7 on both new dao and apm packages. What you think?

[0xGabi]

Replaced by #826